Jump to content


  • Content Сount

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

  • Clan


Community Reputation

24 Neutral

About HolyWaterCow

  • Rank
    Petty Officer
  • Insignia

Recent Profile Visitors

404 profile views
  1. HolyWaterCow

    Are Tier X BBs Going Obsolete?

    (1) "As a cruiser player".... Uhhh, what? I can maybe understand someone saying "as someone who doesn't play CVs"... but who actually dedicates themselves to a certain ship type (excluding ranked or clan battles)? That's weird (fine, be weird/bizarre, who cares) but you immediately put the rest of your comments in the context of: 'In a cruiser versus enemy BBs, I conclude <whatever> about how to play a BB and how they have/have not changed'. (2) "BBs are the easiest to play, but one of the hardest to master"... followed in the next paragraph with "I'd say they are getting harder to drive as its become easier and easier to punish bad play in a BB".... so which is it? Are BBs easy for noobs or are noobs easily punished? As for "mastering" a BB, my points were precisely addressing this. Regardless of circumstances (i.e. what situations you put your ship in), BBs are still far too easy to burn down and AP is far too ineffective/inconsistent. (3) "the changes have done nothing to other changes in the meta that actually changed how BBs used to drive"..... that's simply false. I'm not going to look up which patches (likely multiple different ones gradually) changed BB maneuverability. But again, that isn't my complaint. The maneuverability is better/more realistic now and it's only an issue because of the the fire and AP ineffectiveness issues. (4) "PS. If you think its bad it got harder to drive the easiest class, go drive a DD".... Uhhh, again, what? You make it sound like people only play one ship type. I play all of them (CVs to a lesser extent) and I always play DD in ranked and rank out in the DD (reason being, it's the easiest ship type in terms of "mastering".... create the circumstances 99%+ of the time rather than be at the mercy of them). (5) "I wanted to add that I do drive BBs and do fine in them <explanation>"..... DD torps aren't the biggest threat. We're talking about T10 BBs, not T3-T-7. And you play a Yamato, GKurfurst, Montana, etc. like a cruiser? What does that even mean? You can't play them like cruisers because they are fundamentally different... let me take my GKurfurst out for a drive and play it like an Henri or Des Moines (lolwut). That maybe makes some sense if you're comparing a Moskva/Stalingrad to a Yamato/Frenchy BB but otherwise what are you talking about. I really shouldn't have responded (but I've typed this crap already so whatever), but you didn't even address the two specifics I said were the problem: too easy to set on fire and unreliable/ineffective AP (which were also what the guy I originally quoted mentioned as the problems).
  2. HolyWaterCow

    Are Tier X BBs Going Obsolete?

    ^This. A few things have changed since I started playing this game a couple years ago that have negatively impact T10 BBs - (1) too many fires and (2) bizarrely unreliable AP damage. ***There are many more fire-starting ships now. It used to be a few cruisers, specifically the IJN cruisers, which posed a significant fire threat but now there are so many cruiser lines+premium cruisers in the game that there has inevitably been an increase in HE fire-starters (exceptions of course being UK and Italian lines). Also, WG added DD gunboats (not really an issue for BBs though tbh) and what really drives me nuts: HE BBs which have absurdly high fire starting percentages (UK BBs & French BBs to a lesser extent). ***The nerfing of battleship maneuverability (like ~2 years ago?) made BB movement much more realistic and was a necessary nerf since the acceleration and turning of BBs was too good. But combine this with the increase in HE spam and the big fat T10 BBs can easily be burned down, especially if the enemy team is smart enough to focus fire. ***Battleship AP is not effective enough. Like the quoted post above says, there are way too many overpens and ricochets (nothing worse than a well placed AP salvo resulting in both overpens and ricochets...). T10 BB AP shells are huge, they shouldn't be bouncing so easily off an enemy BB without causing any damage and the shells shouldn't be overpenning broadside cruisers without causing at the very least, moderate damage. Unless your shells are penetrating the sails of an old tall-ship, AP shells broadside shouldn't overpen so easily. Yamato, Ohio, Kremlin, Georgia, etc. have massive guns but often even well-placed shells that don't register as overpens/ricochets still do very little/no damage. This especially occurs when facing a heavy cruiser/BB facing bow-forward. Shells bounce from the very well-armored bow so okay, you aim for the superstructure... but even with perfect hits to the superstructure, the damage is often ~1-3k (this happens all the time against Stalingrad and the French T9s/10s). The enemy's turrets seem like the only semi-vulnerable part of the ship. These are supposed to be 16"+ shells. It's insane. The BB which best represents the cumulative negative impact these changes have had on BBs is the Grosser Kurfurst - (1) too many fires and (2) bizarrely unreliable AP damage.
  3. HolyWaterCow

    Somers worth it?

    With the coupon, I'd have enough steel to get the Somers OR enough coal to get the Smolensk. The Smolensk's park, smoke, and spam HE like an annoying gnat playing style doesn't really appeal to me (but on the other hand, it is ridiculously OP). The first vids on YouTube that I saw about the Somers had great reviews. Now, I see people saying it's no good (apparently it was nerfed? or maybe ppl just like to complain?). Either way, is the Somers worth it? A Gearing/Shimakaze hybrid seems pretty appealing but it's 25k steel..... Any1 have the Somers and/or thoughts on it?
  4. HolyWaterCow

    Black Torp question

    I absolutely love the Black's torps. Fast torp reload, long distance (13.7km), and my favorite part - the slowwww speed (no, that isn't sarcasm). I joke that the torps are like floating sea mines that drift with the current but that's not a bad thing as long as you play to its primary strength... (its torps, not its radar). Use the torps to target an area rather than trying to actively target a particular ship. Instead, the torps should be used to target a cluster of enemy ships and to defend caps by saturating it with torps. It's great for both of these because the torp reload is quite fast (you literally can fire a second wave of torps while the first wave of torps are still traveling so you can saturate an area with torps), the torp detection is low, and the range of the torps allow you to remain far enough away so that you can launch loads of torps without being detected (by either enemy radar or enemy DDs). As for the torp speed and why I love it, I've noticed the slow speed seems to throw off a lot of players who attempt to dodge the torps as if they're expecting traditional ~60+knot torps and end up getting hit because they aren't expecting torps that are so unconventionally slow (I see this all the time with torps hits I get in the Black; the enemy capt so often looks confused while attempting to dodge the slow torps). Even though the Black also has the unique trait of radar, you shouldn't just charge into a cap with the intent of popping a smoke and using the radar to hunt enemy DDs and/or cap. The Black's guns aren't good enough and the radar doesn't have the range nor duration to rely on this style of play. Doing that can be great but is highly circumstantial (enemy DD needs to be fairly low in HP and you better be sure there isn't an enemy radar cruiser nearby). The torps are only really bad in this circumstance because once you're either detected or your presence is known (for example, from popping a smoke in the cap), the enemy is expecting your torps, knows roughly where they're coming from, and this is when the slow torp speed is really a problem. Cliff notes: 1. Spam torps from medium/long range at clusters of enemy ships (individual, sluggish BBs works too) and/or to deny caps. That's where the torp hits come from. 2. Yes, the Black is the DD with radar but don't expect much success from the tactic of hastily pushing a cap with the intent of popping smoke+radar because your guns are too weak and torps too slow to be effective in a close-range/brawl scenario. The circumstances need to be juuust right for that to be effective.
  5. HolyWaterCow

    Epic Exeter game

    What's the best build/capt build for this ship? Trying to get an idea of what the new line will be like.
  6. HolyWaterCow

    What is the easiest Battleship line to grind

    Most basic advice first, if you're grinding to reach tier 10 as fast as possible, consider which lines have the better ships at the higher tiers (mostly t8/t9) since you'll need to play those tiers much more than the lower/mid tier ships. If you're grinding for research points (resetting a line and replaying it), I'd recommend the IJN DD lines. DDs are a faster grind than cruisers and BBs (a lot of experience comes from capping) and IJN DDs are quality and fun. If not, ignore this point. As for the easiest BB lines to grind to tier 10 (listed in order... and with most consideration on the higher tier ships): 1. Russian is the easiest imo and they are fun since they are accurate and hit hard (plus the AA massacres planes which is always a hoot). Very straight forward playing style. 2. British is probably second easiest but boring as hell imo since they rely on HE and sitting back due to weak armor. If "easy" is your priority then this is a good choice but bring a good book or some yarn to knit something because sitting at distance is boring and it feels like you're not even involved in the battle. 3. French is somewhat similar to British but more well-rounded - better at pushing up plus good secondaries. Not as "easy" as British BBs because you can't be borderline comatose but still, not as involved as other BB lines. 4. IJN is a fun and diverse line with some excellent ships but the problem with the line regarding grinding to tier 10 is that the line gets a little too diverse when you hit the brick wall that is the Izumo. The Izumo, especially being at tier 9 (requiring tons of XP to get through it) is reason enough not to pick the IJN line if easy grinding is your priority. 5. USN is fun and doesn't have any horrid ships but to grind quickly to tier 10, you actually have to pay attention due to the relatively slow/lofty shell trajectory as well as the relatively smaller guns which make it harder to do AP dmg to enemy BBs. That said, they are fantastic for hitting cruiser citadels (particularly tier 9 and 10 which have excellent dispersion). Same goes for citting enemy BBs but again, the smaller guns means you need to hit them from medium-ish range when they show their broadside (usually while they're mid-turn.... or if they're just aloof and have their broadside exposed). 6. German BBs are brawlers that were great and would have been #1 on this list 2 years ago but they have been power crept, mostly due to the introduction of all the HE spamming ships which has made it hard to get close enough to brawl (i.e. make use of secondaries, strong armor, and so the wildly sloppy main guns can get the shell close enough to where you're aiming). Even if you play well, you can be surprised at how little dmg you did when the battle is over because the secondaries don't do all that much dmg (and they usually don't start fires often enough to cause a lot of fire damage) and even if you get a lot of hits with the main guns, the lousy dispersion often results in low dmg hits). I made the mistake of resetting my German BB line for research points thinking it would be fun brawling like when I first played the German line. Wow it was frustrating getting focus fired by all the new HE spamming ships and the grind felt like it took forever, even when playing my formerly favorite tier8 BB, Bismarck. What? Perhaps the lower/mid tier Russian BBs aren't anything special but the higher tiers are very good and easy to play. Since it takes less time to grind the lower/mid tiers, the quality of the higher tiers is more relevant and with the Russian BB line, the higher tier Russian BBs are about as simple as it gets. Powerful guns with excellent shell dispersion plus their shell velocity + trajectory is fast and flat. High survivability because of excellent armor (especially when pointed bow forward) along with a huge HP pool. I forget about the AA for the t8 and t9 but for the Kremlin, is has the best AA of any BB by far. In the higher tiers, it's like the Russian line has all the strengths of the other BB lines without the weaknesses (exception being the lousy secondaries). I'd say the German line, once the most fun and perhaps the best BB line when introduced, is now the most difficult at higher tiers since it's been power crept by all the new HE spamming lines/ships. German BBs are lumbering giants made for brawling - great secondaries, strong armor, large HP pool, and guns with such lousy and sloppy dispersion that you need to get into close range like you're using a blunderbuss. That was great fun and very often effective but now there are so many HE spamming ships (rendering the strong armor useless) who naturally will focus their fire on the big, slow BB that has to push ahead of its BB teammates to get into a range where it can start doing damage. Also, German BBs have inadequate AA so CVs also naturally prefer sending their planes to attack the big, slow BB. German BBs can't sit at long range and HE spammers+CVs love focusing them so you need to be much more cautious (painfully so), aware, and smart about when/where to push to use the ship effectively.
  7. HolyWaterCow

    Midway is the worst performing T10 CV

    Achieving a balance so that CVs are not underpowered or overpowered is difficult given that it's a unique ship but it is very obvious that, currently, the balance is lousy. A balanced game is one where the outcome is mostly in the players' hands (both for CV and regular ship players). When overpowered, CV players hardly need to think/adapt their gameplay at all. When underpowered, CV players can barely make an impact regardless of how well they adapt their gameplay. CVs being underpowered/overpowered is almost entirely dependent on the proportion of ships with great/good AA to ships with mediocre/bad AA (in other words, the focus should be less on the CVs and more on AA capability). Tier 4 - CVs are overpowered since far too many ships either have either zero AA or terrible AA. Tier 6 - CVs are balanced thanks to a good ratio of ships with good AA to ships with mediocre/poor AA. Tier 8 - the balance shifts to underpowered since more and more ships have good AA... but t8 CVs can be extremely underpowered when uptiered (much more so than a regular t8 ship being uptiered). Being uptiered as a CV in a t9/t10 battle seems to happen all the time in a t8 CV (...or perhaps it just seems that way since it's so ridiculously underpowered/utterly impotent against t9/t10 ships' AA that these games are so noticeable...). Tier 10, underpowered given the ridiculous amount of outstanding AA that t9/t10 ships have. Tier 4 needs more ships with at least mediocre AA so CV play isn't a turkey shoot of the many utterly helpless ships that either have little/no AA and are too slow to move to teammates with better AA. Tier 6 is pretty well balanced and should be the model for how the other tiers can be adjusted. Tier 8 and especially Tier 10 needs fewer ships with amazing AA because CV gameplay at these tiers is often reduced to hunting DDs and/or hoping that there are some cruisers+BBs without incredible AA and then hoping that, after several minutes (when ships have had enough time to move from the relatively close proximity of each other when the battle starts), maybe one or two of the few heavy cruisers/BBs that don't have incredible AA are dumb enough to stray too far from their teammates. Cliff notes: *proper balance puts the outcome in the players' hands (for both CV and regular ships) rather than being too influenced by (1) the tier and (2) the luck of the draw. *achieving proper balance for CVs is almost entirely down creating the proper balance of ships with great/good AA to mediocre/bad AA (the rework removed CV fighter squadrons so the issues are almost entirely down to CV vs AA rather than CV vs CV). Tier 6 is the best example of a reasonable balance of AA - not too much, not too little... which allows good CV players to succeed and lousy ones to fail. *proper balance also encourages (sort of forces) better teamplay overall in random battles since ships with mediocre/bad AA need to stay closer to the great/good AA ships. How can you argue CVs don't belong in the game? Everyone knows they played a huge role in naval warfare in WW2 and emerged as far more important than battleships (or any other ship for that matter). I can't think of a single naval battle in the Pacific where carriers didn't play at least some role. Even in the Atlantic they became important for searching for enemy subs (hopefully when subs are introduced, CVs are updated to be in an important part of search and destroy of subs). Of course WOWS isn't realism but they want to keep it somewhat realistic. And as for your theory of the CVs only being underpowered or overpowered..... how about.... balanced? Yes, AA is too powerful for too many ships at the higher tiers. I think the aiming is fine though. They need to restrict incredible AA to just a couple lines. It used to be that USN ships were the only ships with AA that you'd want to avoid... now it's practically all cruisers and most battleships. Russian BB AA obviously needs a nerf and most cruisers do as well excluding USN cruisers (since their primary role IRL and in game was to provide AA support). Torpedo damage/flooding is probably the only issue I think that needs to be addressed specifically for CVs. The damage is laughable and so are the lack of floods (I've only reached t10 in USN CVs so perhaps it's just the USN line? I don't know).
  8. HolyWaterCow

    Scharnhorst Deck

    Germany's high command realized that as the war went on that they were becoming strapped for resources and needed to reallocate resources to support Germany's most pressing needs. Donitz was ordered to remove all the teak from the Scharnhorst's deck and replace it with particle board. The teak was to be removed and used to make designer furniture which would then be sold at a garage sale in order to raise funds to pay for surgery to fix Goebbels' clubbed foot. It grossed everyone out to the point that they couldn't concentrate on the war so the high command made the surgery a national priority. However, the order never reached Donitz so the Scharnhorst's deck remained teak, Goebbels' clubbed foot was never fixed, and as a result Germany lost the war.
  9. HolyWaterCow

    Hatsuharu vs. Fubuki

    I looked at both ships and on paper they same very similar.... The Hatsuharu is in the same IJN DD line as the Harugumo/Kitty/Akizuki (primarily gun boats) and the Fubuki is in the same line as the Shima/Kagero (primarily torp boats) but there doesn't appear to be a distinct difference between the Hatsuharu and Fubuki despite being in different branches. They both carry the same guns (calibre and # of guns). They also carry the same torps. I haven't played the lower tiers of IJN DDs since they created the 2nd branch like a year+ ago (back when Fubuki was tier 8) so please excuse my ignorance but I'm not willing to buy both boats and mess around with them in Random Battle to determine which one I'd use in Ranked Sprint....hence the thread. So... what are the primary differences? More specifically, which one plays better as a fire-starter that can burn down fat tier 6 BBs? I love me some slow shooting IJN guns that have decent range, decent trajectory/velocity, and exceptionally high fire starting chance.
  10. HolyWaterCow

    New York or Texas

    Assumed you were talking about differences between the two ships regarding the specific trait differences that were being discussed (such as AA, range, speed, turning, etc.).
  11. HolyWaterCow

    New York or Texas

    Uhhh, what? It is both undeniable that Texas is the better ship AND arguable that the differences are so minor that they don't much matter? Maybe I'm missing something but that gave me a good chuckle. ANYWAYS, what capt setup do you guys like? The AA is incredible for its tier, it's like enemy planes are running into a buzzsaw... but the AA range is quite limited. The range makes the AA useful for protecting yourself (and really close by teammates) from air attacks. With no way to extend the AA range past 3.5km at tier 5, it seems like a waste of capt skills to choose any AA-related upgrades like BFT/AFT/ManualFireControl. Assuming it'll eventually be a 19pts capt, I plan on getting: Expert Loader, Expert Marksman, Adrenaline Rush, Concealment, and Fire Prevention. That leaves 6 pts remaining (and obv I'd have to pick a tier 3 capt skill). Perhaps Vigilance, High Alert, and Priority Target (or perhaps in place of Priority Target, Preventative Maintenance). Just wondering because I haven't played low tier ships in forever and forget what skills are most important for low/mid tier battles.
  12. I have used freeXP to skip up to 6 so far without buying a single ship. I want to get to the Kremlin but, not having enough freeXP to get all the way there, I need to choose which BBs I will play to get to tier 10. So out of the Russian tier 7, 8, and 9 BBs, which are the most dominant (relevant to their tier) and/or enjoyable to play? Thanks.
  13. HolyWaterCow

    Jutland Nerf

    New to the UK DD line and now have a tier 8 (had loads of free xp). Whats the best 19 pts capt build for the t8, t9, and t10?